observations and recommendations on fire management in …...on april 15, 2013 made a field visit to...
TRANSCRIPT
Observations and Recommendations on Fire Management in Nepal
Final Report – May 14, 2013
Charles W. McHugh, Fire Spatial Analyst USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station
Fire, Fuel, and Smoke Science Program Fire Sciences Laboratory
Missoula, Montana
Report covers a trip to Nepal funded by United States Department of State, United States Forest Service (USFS), and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), and in collaboration with World Wildlife Fund-Nepal. Mission objectives were to provide observations and recommendations of fire management in Nepal after visiting with Nepal Government, stakeholders and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) active in fire management issues.
1 | P a g e
Table of Contents Figures ........................................................................................................................................................... 2
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3
General Observations and Recommendations ............................................................................................. 5
Fire Suppression ........................................................................................................................................ 5
Firefighting Training and Equipment ........................................................................................................ 7
Prebuilding Firelines/Firebreaks ............................................................................................................... 8
Fire Occurrence/Reporting Database ....................................................................................................... 9
Fire Prevention/Awareness/Education ................................................................................................... 10
Early Warning System ............................................................................................................................. 11
Basic Fire Research Needs ...................................................................................................................... 12
Fire Management Considerations ........................................................................................................... 13
Collaborative Forest Management Projects ........................................................................................... 14
Community Forest Users Groups (CFUGs) .............................................................................................. 15
WWF Hariyo Ban Project......................................................................................................................... 16
Conclusions ................................................................................................................................................. 18
Appendix A – Meeting Attendee Information ............................................................................................ 19
Appendix B – List of PowerPoint Presentations .......................................................................................... 24
2 | P a g e
Figures
Figure 1. On April 15, 2013 made a field visit to a recent wildfire on the Kapilbastu Forest District, with
the district fire crew, unit foresters, and WWF-Nepal. Note fire area in the background, left.. ................ 3
Figure 2. Visit to Raniban Community Forest User's Group, Kaski Forest District on April 17, 2013. This
CFUG received basic firefighting training and equipment provided by WWF-Nepal. Keshav Khanal of
WWF-Nepal Coordinator Sustainable Landscapes Hariyo Ban Program (blue shirt left photo). ................ 4
Figure 3. Formal briefing to the Secretary, Under Secretary and other officials within the Ministry of
Forests and Soil Conservation, Kathmandu, Nepal on April 18, 2013. ......................................................... 5
Figure 4. A portion of the Kapilbastu District fire crew, the current crew size is 25. Currently, the fire
crew has no personal protective gear or tools, and has received little to no formal firefighting training. . 7
Figure 5. Five meter wide firebreak on the Tilaurakot Collaborative Forest Management project,
Kapilbastu Forest District. These lines will require annual maintenance to maintain their effectiveness as
firebreaks. ..................................................................................................................................................... 8
Figure 6. Photo on left illustrates a seed tree regeneration method, Kapilbastu District. Left photo shows
harvested material. ..................................................................................................................................... 15
Figure 7. Local CFUG observed on a wildfire along the East-West Highway on the Rupandehi District
between Motipur and Butwal, Nepal on April 16, 2013. This CFUG has not received any basic firefighting
training or equipment. ................................................................................................................................ 16
Figure 8. Visit to the Raniban Community Forest User Group (CFUG members, right) in Bhadaure in the
Kaski District, April 17, 2013. Keshav Khanal of WWF-Nepal, Coordinator Sustainable Landscapes Hariyo
Ban Program in fire clothes (left photo) ..................................................................................................... 17
3 | P a g e
Introduction Charles (Chuck) McHugh from the Fire, Fuels, and Smoke Program, Missoula Fire Sciences Laboratory,
Rocky Mountain Research Station traveled to Nepal from April 4-20, 2013. Objectives of the visit were
to,
Attend and present on geospatial decision support tools for modeling wildland fire at the
Developing Forest Adaptation Strategies under Changing Climate Scenarios: Geospatial
Support Systems for Improved Forest Fire Management workshop. Workshop was held in
Kathmandu, Nepal from 10-12 April 2013 at the International Centre for Integrated
Mountain Development (ICIMOD http://www.icimod.org/).
Provide targeted technical support and comments regarding fire and fire management on
the USAID-WWF Hariyo Ban Project.
Provide comments and observations regarding fire management issues in Nepal to the
Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation (MoFSC).
April 15-16 a field visit was made to the Kapilbastu Forest District, meeting with local managers and
reviewing the Tilaurakot Collaborative Forest Management project (Figure 1). During this visit
comments and recommendations regarding the project and potential wildfire and general fire
management issues were provided. April 16th a formal presentation was made focusing on issues related
to the Tilaurakot Collaborative Forest Management to 25 people (Appendix A). This talk also focused on
general firefighting suppression terminology, techniques, and safety as this was identified as an area of
concern by local forest managers. The Kathmandu Post, a local daily newspaper highlighted this
presentation (http://www.ekantipur.com/the-kathmandu-post/2013/04/22/development/firefighting-
is-no-childs-play/247877.html).
Figure 1. On April 15, 2013 made a field visit to a recent wildfire on the Kapilbastu Forest District, with the district fire crew, unit foresters, and WWF-Nepal. Note fire area in the background, left.
4 | P a g e
On April 17th met with the Raniban Community Forest User Group (CFUG) in Bhadaure, Nepal in the
Kaski Forest District (Figure 2). This particular CFUG in cooperation and with assistance from USAID and
WWF-Nepal had received basic firefighting training, personal protective gear, tools and equipment.
Feedback and comments were provided back to USAID and WWF-Nepal regarding this specific area of
the larger Hariyo Ban project during a closeout meeting later in the week in Kathmandu. A presentation
was also made later on April 17th to 18 people (Appendix A) on general fire management issues in Nepal
in Pokhara, Nepal.
Figure 2. Visit to Raniban Community Forest User's Group (CFUG), Kaski Forest District on April 17, 2013. This CFUG received basic firefighting training and equipment provided by WWF-Nepal. Keshav Khanal of WWF-Nepal Coordinator Sustainable Landscapes Hariyo Ban Program examining firefighting equipment (blue shirt left photo).
On April 18th, a formal briefing was provided to the Secretary, Under Secretary, and other officials within
the Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation (Appendix A; Figure 3). Talk focused on observations
regarding wildfire and fire management in the country of Nepal based on field visits and discussions with
managers, forest community members, and staff of involved NGO’s. Topics addressed included;
Firefighter training and safety
Early Warning Systems
Fire Danger Rating
Fire Prevention Education and Awareness
Fire Occurrence Reporting and Statistical Databases
Tilaurakot Collaborative Forest Management Project
General Fire Management Considerations
Basic Fire Research Needs
WWF-USAID Hariyo Ban project and firefighting training and equipment
5 | P a g e
Figure 3. Formal briefing to the Secretary, Under Secretary and other officials within the Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation, Kathmandu, Nepal on April 18, 2013.
All PowerPoint presentations given during this trip are available through the USFS International
Programs Office (Appendix B).
General Observations and Recommendations The following observations, comments and recommendations focus on key areas based on site visits and
discussions with Nepal Department of Forestry (DoF), Senior MoFSC leadership, CFUGs, ICIMOD, USAID,
and WWF-Nepal staff. Allotted time did not permit for visits or discussion with Nepal National Parks.
Fire Suppression Currently, fire suppression is the cornerstone of the fire management strategy in Nepal.
However, it is impossible to use fire suppression to eliminate the wildfire problem.
Suppression of every fire eventually contributes to an even greater fire problem in the future.
Excessive suppression may lead to larger and more severe fires in the future, due to fuel build-
up and no break in fuel age class distributions across the landscape.
Currently, the brunt of fire suppression falls on local CFUG’s except when fires become large,
exceeding the capability of local CFUG’s or District Forest Units. Then, either the Army or Police
are called in to assist with suppression efforts.
6 | P a g e
There appears to be a limited understanding of command/control/responsibility or coordination
with Army or Police on fire incidents. This can lead to misunderstandings of who is in charge or
responsible for specific incidents.
Nepal DoF units are not well equipped or formally trained. Require more training on safety,
suppression strategy and techniques. Look for additional ways to include information and
training on the Incident Command System (ICS).
With increasing numbers of fire numbers and size, eventually can’t depend on CFUG’s for initial
fire suppression responsibility. Eventually, the problem too large and costly and will become the
primary responsibility of the Nepali Government, e.g., DoF, Army or Police.
Currently, there is little organized and institutionalized training or basic firefighting equipment
available at all levels.
Increasing fire sizes and severity may lead to increased loss of critical forest habitats and
contribute to long-term impacts to other natural resources and communities.
Fire suppression responsibilities cannot be entirely transferred to the CFUG’s; eventually too
large and costly, will eventually fall on the responsibility of Government.
In the United States, suppression of all fires has not worked. Currently over 50% of the USFS
budget is committed to fire suppression in some form or another with little appreciable change
in the number of fires and annual area burned.
While the statement is made in Nepal that the number of fires and fire severity has been
increasing over time there is little to no data available to quantitatively analyze this statement.
Currently, no formal reporting system for fires tracking area or cause. MODIS detects and alerts
(ICIMOD) are used to count fire occurrences, but little other information is collected regarding
fire sizes, number of fires or specific cause
No fire severity/intensity mapping products are currently available, e.g., no Monitoring Trends in
Burn Severity (MTBS http://www.mtbs.gov) equivalent.
Current hypothesis is with climate change Nepal is likely to see an increase in the number of fire
occurrences, annual area burned, and an increased fire severity and intensity. Again, there is no
systematic data collection occurring to analyze these trends; historically, current status or into
the future.
Nepal DoF should revisit their stated strategy of fire suppression and reexamine its feasibility as
a long-term sustainable strategy.
Recommendation:
Short-term: Incorporate cross-training exercises with local CFUG’s and DoF, Police, and Army
whenever possible. Conduct training focusing on safety, suppression strategy and techniques as well
as training in the Incident Command System (ICS).
Long-term: Develop a national institutionalized fire training program across all levels of
Government with fire suppression responsibilities (DoF, Police, and Army). Consider assigning
training responsibilities to the Regional Forestry Training Center. Development of additional
curriculum for wildfire and prescribed fire for land management developed at Institute of Forestry.
7 | P a g e
Firefighting Training and Equipment Real need for training of firefighters at all levels, from CFUGs, local district fire personnel,
police and army which are brought in to assist on larger fires.
Safety training lacking, e.g., Lookouts, Communications, Escape Routes, and Safety Zones
(LCES).
Lack of training in suppression strategy and techniques across all levels of fire suppression
responsibility.
Without training and equipment, investment in building firelines/fire breaks and using them
safely may be futile. Without proper training, may contribute to an increase in firefighter
injuries and fatalities.
Currently, most training is being done with CFUG’s with support from NGO’s, such as the WWF.
They are providing training and basic firefighting equipment (tools).
Training should also focus on prescribed fire management and operations.
Training and firefighting safety needs to be institutionalized.
Basic firefighting equipment and personal safety equipment is often lacking. In the areas visited
great gains in personal safety could be realized with the provision of proper footwear, long
sleeve shirts and pants, and gloves (Figure 4).
Figure 4. A portion of the Kapilbastu District fire crew, the current crew size is 25. Currently, the fire crew has no personal protective gear or tools, and has received little to no formal firefighting training.
8 | P a g e
Recommendation:
Short-term: Review and synthesize what training has been completed to date. Capture, where
training has occurred, who has received this training (DoF, Police, and Army, CFUG’s), topics
covered (safety, suppression tactics and strategy), and who conducted the training (NGO’s or
formal Government Institutions). Attempt to understand the depth and extent of training across
Nepal, gaps in training, and to identify potential individuals as future instructors.
Long-term: Develop and coordinate training across all levels; DoF, CFUG’s, Army and Police.
Training exercises should be inclusive across groups whenever feasible, especially within Forest
Districts or geographic areas. Consider creating training cadres that could travel and conduct
training at the local level, thus allowing for a consistent message and training.
Training on prescribed fire management as related to land management also needs to be
addressed. This will require a different approach and focused curriculum.
Prebuilding Firelines/Firebreaks
Figure 5. Five meter wide firebreak on the Tilaurakot Collaborative Forest Management project, Kapilbastu Forest District. These lines will require annual maintenance to maintain their effectiveness as firebreaks.
9 | P a g e
Currently, a major investment is being made at prebuilding firelines/fire breaks (Figure 5).
Often these are being made without consideration of prevailing wind directions associated with
fires and the primary fire spread direction they are meant to control or contain.
To maximize their effectiveness requires firefighters on site. Unattended firebreaks by
themselves will not limit fire spread.
Firefighters on site need to know when it is safe to operate along these predetermined breaks
and when to leave. This relates to previous observations and recommendations regarding
firefighter training, equipment, suppression strategy and techniques, and safety.
Building of firelines/firebreaks may eventually become unsustainable due to:
o Yearly maintenance needs, e.g., removal of accumulated fuels within the lines (Figure 5)
o Costs associated with yearly maintenance
o Too many kilometers of lines to maintain. May eventually become, too costly and not
enough workers to maintain annually.
Control lines may provide access to previous inaccessible areas. This may contribute to:
o Increase in fire starts
o Increase in poaching or timber theft
o Increased resource degradation
Annual maintenance costs may incur additional expenses associated with installation of gates or
fencing in attempts to limit or control access.
Further costs may be incurred as fire prevention patrols or law enforcement patrols are required
to limit illegal activities.
Recommendation:
Short-term: Firelines and fuelbreaks may provide some tactical opportunities for fire suppression
provided properly trained and equipped personal are available to take utilize them; these are
already limitations. Construction of firelines and fuelbreaks will provide accessibility to areas
previous inaccessible areas. This may contribute to Increases in resource degradation, increased
poaching or timber theft, and increases in fire starts due to accessibility.
Long-term: Firelines and fuelbreaks may not be viable or sustainable approaches. Firelines and
firebreaks require a long-term strategy (budgetary and workforce planning) and reconsideration as
an approach to fire control. At some point it can become difficult to sustain due to yearly costs
associated with annual maintenance requirements, increased patrolling, and building and
maintenance of gates and fences to limit access.
Fire Occurrence/Reporting Database
A comprehensive fire occurrence database does not exist at this time. Apparently some records
may exist at District Forest Offices, but the information is not consolidated and readily available
from a central location.
10 | P a g e
Lack of fire reporting information cannot quantitatively determine whether the area burned or
number of fires is increasing, decreasing or stable. Currently, the Government of Nepal, through
ICIMOD, relies on MODIS detects for this information regarding annual numbers of fires.
Media reports regarding fires sizes, home/structure loss on current fire events are based on
loosely gathered information from local District DoF personnel.
Typically, local forest manger estimates the number and sizes of the fires, tabulates and reports
monthly but no official record or data is available.
All fires are human caused, but no information on specific causes and where they occur. Thus,
unable to determine if specific causes vary geographically or temporally. Lack of specific
information on fire starts and their associated specific human causes limits opportunities to
identify geographically and temporally problem areas and specific causes to focus on when
developing prevention, education, and awareness programs.
Reliance on MODIS detects and alerts for counting and recording fire starts and being used as a
surrogate for fire reporting. However, there are issues in trying to use this for accounting such
as:
o Misses many fires due to the coarseness of the data. Center of 1km-2 area.
o Fires less-than 100ha are not reported.
o Misses small smoldering fires and fires not active during satellite overpass
Does not reflect or account for the actual fire business, missing many small fires that require a
cost (workforce and budgetary) for attacking and suppressing.
MODIS detects do not record/account for the actual area/causes of fires. Is not meant to be for
recording/reporting purposes.
Recommendation: Develop a centralized and common themed database on forest fire statistics. At a
minimum should include: discovery date, fire out date, size, specific human cause, location, vegetation
type, fire effects, and fire intensity.
Fire Prevention/Awareness/Education 100% of all fires are believed to be human cause.
Most successful approach to limiting fire starts is through aggressive fire prevention, education,
and awareness programs.
Many human specific causes but currently unknown the actual numbers of fire starts by a
specific cause or where and when occur geographically or temporally.
Numbers and causes will vary by district and whether in the Terai, central hill or mountain
ecoregions.
Knowing timing of when or why happening and occurring are important to understanding where
to focus efforts on prevention messages geographically and the timing of fire
prevention/awareness messages.
Linkages back to the creation of a fire reporting database to assist in directing/focusing the
timing and type of message directed at specific causes at appropriate times of the year.
11 | P a g e
Currently prevention messages are delivered via announcements on FM radio broadcasts twice
a day on individual forest districts. CFUG’s utilize a town crier approach, locally referred to as
catawalling to deliver messages about fire hazards.
No formal fire danger rating program to use to help inform on their current fire season
compared to average and historical norms to aid in decision making.
Currently, fire in Nepal is seen as negative, “destructive, tragic, devastating”. Fire awareness
and education messages need to also account for the positive effects of fire, especially,
regarding management ignited fire or the use of prescribed fire. Not all fires should be
communicated as bad or negative. This complicates message formulation and delivery.
However, presenting all fire as bad will only make it more difficult when trying to implement
management ignited or prescribed fire programs and explaining their benefits.
Need for a focused education and awareness program. Programs need to be active year round
not just during the active fire season. Messages need to promote the positive and negative
effects of fire, and emphasize the need for actively using prescribed fire as a means to treat
fuels and reduce the potential negative effects of fire across the landscape.
Recommendation:
Short-term: Ensure current messages promote the positive and negative effects of fire with emphasize
on the need for actively using prescribed fire as a means to treat fuels and reduce the potential negative
effects of fire across the landscape. Don’t present only the argument that all fire is negative and needs
to be suppressed.
Long-term: Develop fire prevention plans specific to the human causes of fires by Forest District or
region along with focused community education and awareness programs. Develop cohesive and
focused messages regarding fire danger and reasons for limiting fire during certain times of the year.
Need for focused education and awareness programs which are active year round, not just during the
active fire season.
Early Warning System Currently the focus is on detection and notification of emerging fires based on MODIS detection
and notification via the ICIMOD system. As noted previously there are many limitations on the
detection and notification of real time fire events. Also, these messages only go to District Fire
Management Officers and not to the CFUG’s (http://www.icimod.org/?q=10092).
A comprehensive Early Warning system consists of more than just detection and alert. There is a
need to include and account for:
o Changes in fuel conditions contributing to significant fire spread.
o Significant forecasted weather events such as increasing winds that could have
significant impacts on existing fires or new or developing fires.
o Critical weather conditions (temperature, relative humidity, windspeed) associated with
fire spread.
12 | P a g e
o How these vary by Forest District, ecoregion, and affect fire spread over a range of fuel
conditions.
Currently a lack of knowledge in this area of fire management.
Recommendation:
Short-term: Investigate developing information regarding seasonal assessments of fuels and
vegetation. This could focus on developing long-term and historical seasonal trends on vegetation
greenness maps to assist in seasonal severity (http://wfas.net/index.php/avhrr-ndvi-moisture--drought-
47 ). These can be derived based on remote sensing techniques may require working with an NGO such
as ICIMOD for technical assistance.
Long-term: Development of such a system would assist in fire prevention messages when
communicating fire season severity in terms of fuels and vegetation conditions. Would provide needed
information for annual assessments of fire season potential. Allows for comparison of the current fire
season to previous fire seasons in tracking fire season potential, timing of the fire season (early vs. late
based on fuels conditions). Fire suppression planning could benefit by allowing a geographical
comparison of seasonal fire severity across the country and the need for moving or assigning resources.
Basic Fire Research Needs Basic fire science
o Wildfire. Currently little to no information exists under what weather and fuel
conditions associated with specific wildland fuel types that problem fire behavior can
occur
o Prescribed fire. Currently, little to no information exists regarding under what weather
and fuel conditions and time of year (ignition prescription) to conduct prescribed fire for
desirable fire effects across the various fuel and vegetation types
Fuels and fire behavior:
o Little to no available information on wildland fuels and their associated fire behavior
under any type of weather-fuel moisture conditions exists
o Base information in this area is lacking for both prescribed fire and wildfire.
Fire effects
o Fire severity, similar to MTBS. Nepal currently lacks the technological capacity to do this.
Perhaps could be a collaborative endeavor with NGO’s such as ICIMOD.
o No information on fire effects across the range of vegetation types under a range of fire
behavior characteristics.
Fire regimes
o Little information regarding fire regime characteristics (fire return intervals) by
vegetation types across Nepal.
o Fire regimes in Nepal are purely anthropogenic. As such, ignitions are driven by
social/cultural/religious behaviors and population density.
13 | P a g e
o Corresponding fire severity and size are affected by fuel loadings and fuel
distribution/fragmentation across the landscape.
o Need for consolidation/synthesis of this information.
Fire Wildlife Interactions
o Wildlife habitat as affected by fire. Currently, most fire is perceived as bad, tragic,
devastating. Need to know where and under what conditions fire has positive effects in
terms of restoration or maintaining ecological structure, composition, and function.
Could then use management ignited fire or take advantage of fire starts to enhance
habitat across the landscape.
Social perceptions of fire
o Information on social perceptions may assist in development of fire prevention,
education, and awareness messages.
Recommendation:
Short-term: Explore research opportunities for coordination/collaboration on the Tilaurakot
Collaborative Forest Management (CFM) project on the Kapilbastu District area due to the amount of
information currently collected working with NGO’s, ICIMOD, or Universities to address basic
fundamental fire research questions for Nepal in Sal forest types. Similar opportunities should be
investigated on the other CFM projects across Nepal.
Long-term: There is a need to build research capacity in wildland fire, prescribed fire and fire
management within Nepal DoF. Collaborative research efforts need to be established between the
University and Regional Training Center wherever and whenever possible.
Fire Management Considerations A complete fire suppression strategy is unsustainable and will fail in the long-term. As such, the
use of prescribed fire as a fuel treatment tool is essential. Area based fuel treatments
strategically designed and placed will be required to have any meaningful long-term effect on
reducing the amount of area burned.
Management Ignited fire needs to be increased. However, there needs to be discussions
regarding
o How much?
o Where?
o When?
o Under what conditions (weather and fuels) to achieve desired fire effects?
Currently little to no information is available on any or all of these topics.
Current forest management approaches are geared at intensive silviculture designed to
maximize tree growth and economics. Eventually will need a mix of landscape level fuel
treatments intermixed with silvicultural treatments.
14 | P a g e
Area or landscape level fuel treatments using prescribed fire or mechanical removal of
accumulated surface fuels should be the long-term goal to limit negative effects from wildfire.
Need for a focused fire prevention/education and awareness program. Program needs to be
active year round not just during the active fire season. Messages need to promote the positive
and negative effects of fire, and emphasize the need for actively using prescribed fire as a
means to treat fuels and reduce the potential negative effects of fire across the landscape.
Recommendation:
Short-term: Advancement in these areas may require an effort similar to the Government of Nepal
Forest Fire Management Strategy 2010. While there is overlap here with previous topics some are new
and may require discussion at a national level to determine their applicability to Nepal’s unique
situation.
Long-term: Goal should be to not suppress every fire start when and where feasible from a safety and
ecological objective. This will require a nationwide strategy considering fire management on DoF lands,
CFUG’s, National Parks, and protected areas. Considering cross boundary fire transmission across a
variety of stakeholders and land ownership patterns.
Collaborative Forest Management Projects Appears to be a successful program due to the level of community involvement, as such they
have a stake in the outcome associated with the program. Current management strategy is
intensive silviculture (Figure 6).
Positives:
o Provides income and products to local communities
o Local forest unit able to retain control over some of the generated income
Negatives:
o Long-term sustainability of the program
o Income sharing based on the sale of forest products such as timber
o If there is a decrease in timber value or can’t harvest due to restrictions to meet other
environmental demands or considerations, what happens to programs or projects
dependent on income generated from these areas?
Opportunities
o Could some of the income generated from these projects be redirected to
Purchase firefighting equipment?
Pay for firefighter training?
Pay for maintenance of firelines/firebreaks? This should be balanced with
consideration of appropriate training and equipment of personnel.
Could income only be used at the local level or redirected to other national
priorities?
15 | P a g e
As mentioned previously what happens when the level of income decreases or
can’t be sustained? What happens to programs dependent on
Figure 6. Photo on left illustrates a seed tree regeneration method, Kapilbastu District. Left photo shows harvested material.
Recommendation: Program should continue with Government support. Investigate the use of
generated income to support acquisition of firefighting equipment and training for local District Forest
Personnel.
Community Forest Users Groups (CFUGs) Successful approach. Local people are involved and passionate about their role in management
of the surrounding forest.
User groups able to supervise and exert pressure on other community members regarding fire
and other natural resource issues.
Experience with two Community Forest User Groups on this visit. The first in the Terai region
were working an active fire on the Rupandehi District (Figure 7). The second was in the Hill
Country in Bhadaure in the Kaski District (Figures 2 and 8).
The two groups were on different ends of the spectrum regarding firefighting training and
equipment.
o Rupandehi District, had received no training, had no personal protective clothing or
basic firefighting equipment
o Kaski District, had received training and had personal protective clothing and basic
firefighting tools provided through WWF and USAID
Concern is the initial primary responsibility for fire suppression attributed to CFUGs.
o If hypothesized increase in fire numbers, area burned, and increased fire behavior and
intensity occurs, CFUGs will not be able to keep up with the fire problem. Government
will be forced to take a more active and primary role in suppression in the future due to
the magnitude of the problem and associated costs
16 | P a g e
o From livelihood perspective, CFUG members may not always be able to respond as they
are not paid for responding and suppressing fires
o Absence of training and safety awareness as well as lack of personal protective clothing
and basic firefighting equipment is a major concern which should be addressed
Figure 7. Local CFUG observed on a wildfire along the East-West Highway on the Rupandehi District between Motipur and Butwal, Nepal on April 16, 2013. This CFUG has not received any basic firefighting training or equipment.
Recommendation:
Short-term: Continue to provide training and equipment with support from USAID and WWF-Nepal.
This program should be expanded if possible. Investigate expanding existing training programs and
investigate including Government support from MoFSC in conjunction with USAID and WWF-Nepal.
Needed training, safety awareness and provision of personal protective clothing or basic firefighting
equipment should also be addressed.
Long-term: Include trained CFUG firefighting crews in cross-training exercises with other
Government agencies responsible for fire suppression. This will improve familiarity and
communications between groups.
WWF Hariyo Ban Project Visited the Raniban Community Forest User Group in Bhadaure in the Kaski District.
Met with local community members who had received firefighting training, personal protective
gear, and basic firefighting tools through the WWF and USAID program (Figure 8).
During visit we discussed various suppression safety, strategy, and tactics as well as a review of
the equipment that had been provided to the local community members.
It was obvious from discussions they had received training and that the training had been
absorbed.
17 | P a g e
From short visit in Nepal it appears that this program is very successful in providing training,
personal protective clothing, and basic firefighting equipment to the members of these groups.
On April 17th a close-out meeting was held with USAID and WWF-Nepal (Appendix A) at the US
Embassy in Kathmandu where we discussed the project and its goals.
o During this closeout made several recommendations
o Also discussed the fact that suppression is not the answer to their fire problem. That
Nepal will not be able to suppress its way out of forest and wildland fires. Especially,
regarding larger fires and potential negative effects to wildlife habitat, forests, and
biodiversity.
o The need is for active fire management and more prescribed fire.
Figure 8. Visit to the Raniban Community Forest User Group (CFUG members, right) in Bhadaure in the Kaski District, April 17, 2013. Keshav Khanal of WWF-Nepal, Coordinator Sustainable Landscapes Hariyo Ban Program in fire clothes (left photo).
Recommendation:
Program of providing training, personal protective clothing, and basic firefighting equipment
to the members of CFUGs should continue and be expanded if possible.
Suggested they evaluate where and how they are applying their limited resources. Currently
the majority of their funding for such programs is skewed to the hill country rather than the
Terai. In the Terai, fire frequency and fire sizes apparently are both greater when compared
to the hill country. In the hill country fires are thought to be less frequent and typically
smaller in size. Based on the ICIMOD MODIS detect data for the period 2000-2012, 52% of
the fire detects were in the Terai compared to 42% in the hill country. However, the hill
country is much steeper thereby complicating suppression efforts. Also, the hill country
contains greater biodiversity and the potential consequences of soil erosion and habitat loss
from fire may be greater. Requires a trade-off for WWF-Nepal and USAID for what they
want to focus on.
Equipment Suggestions:
o Need for eye-wear protection (goggles). Eye protection was the one piece of missing
personal protective clothing.
18 | P a g e
o Replace flashlights with headlamps. They can be of the backpacking-trekking variety
o Backpack pumps to provide water delivery capability
Recommended developing short one-day refresher training. The goal should be to
reemphasize safety. Would be an opportunity to focus on safety and practices, but also
provide continuing education and training in fire to existing members as well as provide
training to new members.
Conclusions There is a need for a focused fire management unit within the DoF. This will require a long-term
commitment to build and will require a significant investment of funding and staffing with sufficient
resources and support from the MoFSC. Initial responsibilities of this program should first focus on
firefighter safety, training, and equipment as well as coordination with other Government agencies
responsible for fire suppression operations.
A complete fire suppression strategy is unsustainable and will fail in the long-term. As such, the use of
prescribed fire, removal of accumulated fuel loads (fodder or grazing), mechanical treatments of surface
fuels, or some combination to manage wildland fuels is essential. Area based fuel treatments
strategically designed and placed will be required to have any meaningful long-term effect on reducing
the amount of area burned in Nepal. The use of prescribed fire was identified in Nepal’s Forest Fire
Management Strategy 2010. Area or landscape level fuel treatments using prescribed fire or mechanical
removal of accumulated surface fuels should be the long-term goal to limit negative effects from
wildfire.
There is a need for a focused fire prevention/education and awareness program. Such a program needs
to be active year round not just during the active fire season. Messages need to promote the positive
and negative effects of fire, and emphasize the need for actively using prescribed fire as a means to
treat fuels and reduce the potential negative effects of fire across the landscape.
The long-term goal should be to not suppress every fire start when and where feasible, considering the
values at risk, life safety, and ecological objectives. This will require a nationwide strategy considering
fire management on DoF lands, CFUG areas, National Parks, and protected areas. It will need to
consider cross boundary fire transmission across a variety of stakeholders and land ownership patterns.
Nepal as a country faces many challenges as it continues to develop their response to dealing with
wildfire. However, these same challenges offer many opportunities to address issues, formulate policy,
and strategies specific to Nepal’s unique circumstances regarding wildfire and fire management. The
struggle is to find a balance between the international community’s responses to fire/fire management
issues and to critically asses and learn from their experiences, adapting and formulating a plan that is
appropriate to Nepal.
19 | P a g e
Appendix A – Meeting Attendee Information
20 | P a g e
Attendees Forest Fire Management Interaction Meeting
16th April 2013
Kapilbastu District Forest Office,
Taulihawa, Nepal
S.N. Name Designation - Organization
1 Dhan Bahadur Shahi Armed Police Force
2 MohanThapa Assist Inspector of Police
3 Chhedi lal Kamati Police inspector
4 Ganga Nath Tiwari District Administrator
5 Dr. Jahirul Hasan Khan Chairperson- Kapilbastu CFM
6 Krishna Raj neupane Assistant Forest officer
7 Devi Koirala Under Secretary- District Foerst office
8 Humanath Bhattarai Chairperson- FECOFUN Kapilbastu
9 Toya Bahadur Sinjali Armed Police
10 Pashupati Sharma Forest Product users association
11 Krishna Prasad Paudel Assistant Forest officer
12 Balaram Neupane Accountant
13 Rajan Kumar Pokharel Communication Officer, District development Committee
14 Bijay Raj Subedi Assistant Forest officer
15 Giri Raj Pathak Program Officer- RIM NGO
16 Mohan Mishra Ranger- District Forest officer
17 Indira Aryal Fire Controller-Fire Control Network
18 Bashu dev Sendai Assistant Inspector
19 Dhan Bahadur Khadka Assistant Inspector
20 Manoj paudel Journalist
21 Jaya Prakash Pandey Coordinator- CFM
22 Krishna Prasad Pokharel DFO
23 Rajan Khadka Assistant Forest officer
24 Ganesh Prasad Bhattarai Office assistant- DFO
25 Prem Singh Kunwar Officer District Admin office
21 | P a g e
Attendees Presentation on Fire Management Issues in Nepal
17 April 2013
Hotel Crown Himalaya
Pokhara, Nepal
S.N. Name Organization Designation
1 Khagendra Raj Bar District Forest Office, Kaski Assistant Forest Officer
2 Gyanendra Subedi Ecosystem Based Adaptation, IUCN
Filed Supervisor
3 Dharma Raj Paudel Panchase Community Development Organization
Member
4 Binod Bahadur Kunwar Machapuchre Development Organization
Program Officer
5 Kalidas Subedi FECOFUN Kaski Chairperson
6 Prakash Thapa District Soil Conservation Officer Soil Conservation Assistant
7 Bishnu Prasad Pokharel District Soil Conservation Officer Soil Conservation Assistant
8 Raj Kumar Gurung National Trust for Nature Conservation
Conservation Officer
9 Ram Kaji Shrestha Regional Forestry Training Centre Training Officer
10 Rajan Subedi Institute of Forestry Assistant Professor
11 Prabhat Sapkota Regional Forestry Training Centre Training Officer
12 Megharaj Poudel Regional Forestry Directorate, Pokhara
Assistant Forest Officer
13 Dil Bahadur Bhattarai Machapuchre Development Organization
Executive Director
14 Anuja Shrestha Hariyo Ban, WWF Program Associate
15 Shrijana Baral Hariyo Ban, WWF Program Officer
16 Lila Jung Gurung Hariyo Ban, WWF Program Associate
17 Purna Bahadur Kunwar Hariyo Ban, WWF Filed Coordinator
18 Keshav Prasad Khanal Hariyo Ban, WWF Coordinator
22 | P a g e
Attendees Closeout Meeting USAID and WWF Nepal Hariyo Ban Project
18 April 2013
US Embassy
Kathmandu, Nepal
S.N. Name Organization Designation
1 Netra Sharma USAID Nepal NRM & GCC Programs Specialist General Development Office
2 Judy Ogalthorpe WWF-Nepal Chief of Party – Hariyo Ban Program
3 Keshav Prasad Khanal WWF-Nepal Coordinator – Sustainable Landscapes Hariyo Ban Program
23 | P a g e
Main Attendees, Presentation Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation
April 18, 2013
Kathmandu, Nepal
1. Dr. krishna Chandra Paudel, Secretary, Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation 2. Mr. Bharat Pudasaini, Director General, Department of Soil Conservation Watershed
Management 3. Mr. Sahas Man Shrestha, Director General, Department of Forest Survey and Research 4. Mr. Sundar Sharma, Soil Conservation Officer, Under Secretary, Department of Water Induced
Disaster Prevention (DWIDP) 5. Mr. Ram Bhakta Malla, Under Secretary, Ministry of forests and Soil Conservation 6. Mr. Harihar Sigdel, Joint Secretary and Chief, Foreign Aid Coordination Division, Ministry of
Forests and Soil Conservation 7. Mr.Bishwa Nath Oli, Joint Secretary and Chief, Environment Division, Ministry of Forests and Soil
Conservation 8. Mr. Yajna Nath Dahal, Under Secretary, Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation 9. Mr. Shyam Prasad Sharma, Under Secretary, Department of Forests 10. Ms. Madhu Devi Ghimire, Under Secretary, Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation
24 | P a g e
Appendix B – List of PowerPoint Presentations
25 | P a g e
1. April 11, 2013. At Developing Forest Adaptation Strategies under Changing Climate Scenarios:
Geospatial Support Systems for Improved Forest Fire Management workshop. Kathmandu,
International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD):
Presentation_mchugh_geospatial_tools_nepal_ICIMOD_April_11_2013.pdf
2. April 16, 2013. Forest Interaction Meeting, Kapilbastu Forest District Office:
nepal_presentation_kapilbastu_forest_district_april_16_2013.pdf
3. April 17, 2013, Hotel Crown Himalaya, Pokhara, Nepal:
nepal_presentation_pokhara_april_17_2013.pdf
4. April 18, 2013, Presentation Ministry of Forests and Soil Conservation, Kathmandu, Nepal
nepal_presentation_MoFSC_kathmandu_april_18_2013.pdf
All presentations are available upon request from USFS International Programs
(http://www.fs.fed.us/global/contactus.htm) at:
US Forest Service International Programs
Outreach & Partnerships Unit
1 Thomas Circle, NW
Suite 400
Washington D.C., 20005
U.S.A.
Tel: 1-202-644-4600
Fax: 1-202-644-4603